Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Oxford University Press (OUP)
Résumé : International audience
BACKGROUND: The timing of cardiac surgery after stroke in infective endocarditis (IE) remains controversial. We examined the relationship between the timing of surgery after stroke and the incidence of in-hospital and 1-year mortalities. METHODS: Data were obtained from the International Collaboration on Endocarditis-Prospective Cohort Study of 4794 patients with definite IE who were admitted to 64 centers from June 2000 through December 2006. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox regression analyses were performed to estimate the impact of early surgery on hospital and 1-year mortality after adjustments for other significant covariates. RESULTS: Of the 857 patients with IE complicated by ischemic stroke syndromes, 198 who underwent valve replacement surgery poststroke were available for analysis. Overall, 58 (29.3%) patients underwent early surgical treatment vs 140 (70.7%) patients who underwent late surgical treatment. After adjustment for other risk factors, early surgery was not significantly associated with increased in-hospital mortality rates (odds ratio, 2.308; 95% confidence interval [CI], .942-5.652). Overall, probability of death after 1-year follow-up did not differ between 2 treatment groups (27.1% in early surgery and 19.2% in late surgery group, P = .328; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.138; 95% CI, .802-1.650). CONCLUSIONS: There is no apparent survival benefit in delaying surgery when indicated in IE patients after ischemic stroke. Further observational analyses that include detailed pre- and postoperative clinical neurologic findings and advanced imaging data (eg, ischemic stroke size), may allow for more refined recommendations on the optimal timing of valvular surgery in patients with IE and recent stroke syndromes.
ISSN: 1058-4838

hal-00875143
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00875143
DOI : 10.1093/cid/cis878
PUBMED : 23074311

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Elsevier
Résumé : International audience
Aims: The aims of this study were to compare short-and long-term outcomes for clinical T2N0 oesophageal cancer with analysis of (i) primary surgery (S) versus neoadjuvant therapy plus surgery (NS), (ii) squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma subsets; and (iii) neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Methods: Data were collected from 30 European centres from 2000 to 2010. Among 2944 included patients, 355 patients (12.1%) had cT2N0 disease; 285 (S) and 70 (NS), were compared in terms of short-and long-term outcomes. Propensity score matching analyses were used to compensate for differences in baseline characteristics.Results: No significant differences between the groups were shown in terms of in hospital morbidity and mortality. Nodal disease was observed in 50% of S-group at the time of surgery, with 20% pN2/N3. Utilisation of neoadjuvant therapy was associated with significant tumour downstaging as reflected by increases in pT0, pN0 and pTNM stage 0 disease, this effect was further enhanced with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. After adjustment on propensity score and confounding factors, for all patients and subset analysis of squamous cell and adenocarcinoma, neoadjuvant therapy had no significant effect upon survival or recurrence (overall, loco-regional, distant or mixed) compared to surgery alone. There were no significant differences between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in short-or long-term outcomes.Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that a surgery alone treatment approach should be recommended as the primary treatment approach for cT2N0 oesophageal cancer despite 50% of patients having nodal disease at the time of surgery.
ISSN: 0959-8049

hal-01666517
https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-01666517
DOI : 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.11.024